The Palestine thread

Started by give her dixie, October 17, 2012, 01:29:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

seafoid

Quote from: give her dixie on October 26, 2012, 04:57:13 PM
There are many courageous Israeli's who refuse to serve in the IDF, and they usually all go to jail. Another group of people are current IDF soldiers who refuse to take part. 550 of the put their names to the following statement:

We, reserve combat officers and soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces, who were raised upon the principles of Zionism, sacrifice and giving to the people of Israel and to the State of Israel, who have always served in the front lines, and who were the first to carry out any mission, light or heavy, in order to protect the State of Israel and strengthen it.

We, combat officers and soldiers who have served the State of Israel for long weeks every year, in spite of the dear cost to our personal lives, have been on reserve duty all over the Occupied Territories, and were issued commands and directives that had nothing to do with the security of our country, and that had the sole purpose of perpetuating our control over the Palestinian people.

We, whose eyes have seen the bloody toll this Occupation exacts from both sides.

We, who sensed how the commands issued to us in the Territories, destroy all the values we had absorbed while growing up in this country.

We, who understand now that the price of Occupation is the loss of IDF's human character and the corruption of the entire Israeli society.

We, who know that the Territories are not Israel, and that all settlements are bound to be evacuated in the end.

We hereby declare that we shall not continue to fight this War of the Settlements.

We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.

We hereby declare that we shall continue serving in the Israel Defense Forces in any mission that serves Israel's defense.

The missions of occupation and oppression do not serve this purpose – and we shall take no part in them.

When the settlers go to the Wailing wall they pray the Shema like the rest of their people. It is the holiest prayer in Judaism. 

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/706162/jewish/Translation.htm

"And it will be, if you will diligently obey My commandments which I enjoin upon you this day, to love the L-rd your G-d and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul, I will give rain for your land at the proper time, the early rain and the late rain, and you will gather in your grain, your wine and your oil. And I will give grass in your fields for your cattle, and you will eat and be sated. Take care lest your heart be lured away, and you turn astray and worship alien gods and bow down to them. For then the L-rd's wrath will flare up against you, and He will close the heavens so that there will be no rain and the earth will not yield its produce, and you will swiftly perish from the good land which the L-rd gives you. "


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfF6-TkAnBM


The settlements are an alien god. Torture is an alien god.
There was a similar incident with a golden calf a while ago.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

give her dixie

Quote from: deiseach on October 26, 2012, 04:46:52 PM
Quote from: LeoMc on October 26, 2012, 04:03:15 PM
No more comparable than than South Africa and Israel.

Israel is unquestionably comparable to apartheid South Africa. Both are states where rights are conferred based on blood. Israel wouldn't even dispute that, so why would anyone else?


Good article for you Deiseach

Address by President Nelson Mandela at the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People in 1997

http://anc.org.za/show.php?id=3384
next stop, September 10, for number 4......

deiseach

Quote from: Ball DeBeaver on October 26, 2012, 05:00:49 PM
Has anyone got a problem with me quoting the ultra zionist Guardian?  ::)

Not at all. The author lists numerous examples of the nature of Israel as an apartheid state. After all that, his conclusion seems to be it's not an apartheid state because 1) some Arabs have the vote and 2) it just isn't, okay? I don't think you read it.

seafoid

Quote from: give her dixie on October 26, 2012, 04:28:31 PM
When Israel bombed the UN buildings and schools in Gaza during Cast Lead, their spokesman, Mark Regev, came on TV and said they responded to fire from these locations. We knew all along they were lying, and today they have admitted to lying. What else did they lie about?

This is Mark Regev telling said lies to Paxman on Newsnight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9wv0giW1elo

This is his interview with Jon Snow where Jon cuts him off at the end due to his lies, complete with sub titles to explain what Mark is really saying !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMd_js_oQAk

This is Irishman John Ging, the head of the UN relief and works agency in Gaza during Cast Lead, explain how Israel knew the exact locations of their buildings and still went ahead and bombed them.

Thanks for the Regev Links, GHD

This internet thing is fabulous. 

"Israel uses no weapons that are illegal under international law" " we are conducting our internal investigations"
"We take such allegations extremely seriously"

What a lying b*stard

But what would you expect, frankly?
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Ball DeBeaver


Saudi Arabia Funds Mossad Anti-Iran Operations'

An article posted by a former CBS News editor claims that none other than Saudi Arabia helps fund Israeli Mossad operations against Iran.


AAFont Size
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
First Publish: 10/28/2012, 1:25 PM




Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia


An article posted by a former CBS News producer Barry Lando claims that none other than Saudi Arabia helps fund Israeli Mossad operations against Iran.

"A Strange Alliance: Are the Saudis Bankrolling Israel's Mossad?" appears on his blog. Lando's source is named only as "a friend, with good sources in the Israeli government."

He wrote, "The head of Israel's Mossad has made several trips to deal with his counterparts in Saudi Arabia-one of the results: an agreement that the Saudis would bankroll the series of assassinations of several of Iran's top nuclear experts that have occurred over the past couple of years.

"The amount involved, my friend claims, was $1 billion dollars. A sum, he says, the Saudis considered cheap for the damage done to Iran's nuclear program."

Lando admitted that "the tale sounds preposterous" but added, "On the other hand. it makes eminent sense. The murky swamp of Middle East politics has nothing to do with the easy slogans and 30-second sound bites of presidential debates."

Israel and Saudi Arabia have at least one thing in common: neither country wants to allow Ahmadinejad to obtain nuclear capability.

Lando noted that the claim of the strange alliance "also makes perfect sense, that, in retaliation for the cyber attacks on their centrifuges, the Iranians reportedly launched their own cyber attack on a Saudi state-owned target: Saudi Aramco, the world's most valuable company."

Aramco's computer system suffered a massive cyber attack in August, and American intelligence officials have blamed Iran.

"A report earlier this year by Tel Aviv University cites Saudi Arabia as the last hope and defense line for Israel," Lando wrote. "With most of Israel's traditional allies in the region sent packing or undermined by the Arab Spring, the Saudis are the Jewish State's last chance to protect its political interests in the Arab world."

Lando has long experience on Iran. He recently wrote a book called "Web of Deceit: The History of Western Complicity in Iraq, from Churchill to Kennedy to George W. Bush."

He charged on Counterpunch earlier this year that Israel, the United States and Iran do not understand each other's motives while "their advisors are engaged in an incredibly dangerous three-way game of blind man's bluff."

He said he personally ran into American ignorance in 1980 when he was producing '60 Minutes'.

"I was struck by the total inability of Americans—even at the highest level—to understand the emotions and history that drove the hatred of all things American that had exploded in Iran with the fall of the Shah," Lando wrote.

"Just up West 57th street from CBS News, for instance, was a huge billboard with the diabolical image of Khomeini glowering down on New York. I suggested we do a report to give Americans a better idea of what was driving Iran's revolutionaries and their violent feelings against the United States....

"I stitched together a tough report with Mike Wallace based on a series of interviews in New York and Washington.' Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was charged by one interviewee "for turning a blind eye to the excesses of the Shah, and refusing to have any contact with the opposition groups."

Lando also reported that classified U.S. documents exposed by Iran "showed that American diplomats based in Teheran had warned Washington months earlier of the threat of a possible hostage-taking – particularly if the U.S. allowed the despised Shah to come to America for medical treatment, as the U.S. ultimately did. Those warnings had been completely ignored by Washington."

However, before the program was broadcast, President Jimmy Carter called the president of CBS News "to try to convince him not to broadcast the report. It would, he said, undermine U.S. negotiations with Iran at a very delicate time."

CBS did not agree to back down but agreed to change the report's title from "Should the U.S. Apologize?" to a more neutral "The Iran File."

"It was difficult to understand how our report could upset the hostage negotiations," wrote Lando. "We were not revealing any secrets to Iran. The Iranians already knew well the role of the U.S. in their own history. The people we were informing were 20 million Americans — who didn't understand what was really roiling Iran.

"And still don't."



http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/161407

At least the Saudis know the right side to be on.  ;)
ani ohevet et Yisrael.
אני אוהבת את ישראל

seafoid

Israeli embassy slurs Vincent Browne as an antisemite for saying


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-antisemitic-claims-vincent-browne-3276074.html

"Israel is the cancer in foreign affairs. It polarises the Islamic community of the world against the rest of the world"

Meanwhile over in Chicago , Rahm Emanuel tells Israel that Obama has managed to isolate Iran from the est of the world as a service to
Israel


http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/focus-u-s-a/rahm-emanuel-to-haaretz-thanks-to-obama-iran-is-isolated-from-the-world.premium-1.472638


"Emanuel replies that President Obama has been "a very good friend of Israel" on each of the key issues concerning the two countries' relationship: The peace process, Iran, the Arab spring, military cooperation and common values.

On Iran, Emanuel said that "there is an appreciation of Israel's sense of threat of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon – and when he (Obama) went into the Oval office, when it came to Iran and the international community, America was isolated – in three and a half years, the tables have been turned, and Iran is isolated from the world. That's because of the leadership of the President.""

And Emanuel is not a co religionist of VB either
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Ball DeBeaver


US Slams 'Irresponsible and Unacceptable' Israel Boycott

Amb. Susan Rice slammed Richard Falk's call for a boycott of companies accused of profiting from "illegal Israeli settlements."


AAFont Size
By Rachel Hirshfeld
First Publish: 10/28/2012, 9:26 AM




U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice

Israel news photo: Flash 90


The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, on Thursday slammed United Nations special rapporteur Richard Falk's call for a boycott of private companies accused of profiting from the so-called "illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank" as being "irresponsible and unacceptable."

Falk singled out U.S. companies including Caterpillar, Motorola and Hewlett-Packard along with other multinationals in a report to the U.N. on Thursday.

"My main recommendation is that the businesses highlighted in the report — as well as the many other businesses that are profiting from the Israeli settlement enterprise — should be boycotted, until they bring their operations into line with international human rights and humanitarian law and standards," Falk said in a statement emailed by the UN.

"In short, businesses should not breach international humanitarian law provisions. Nor should they be complicit in any breaches," he charged. "If they do, they may be subject to criminal or civil liability. And this liability can be extended to individual employees of such businesses."

The U.S. delegation has repeatedly clashed with Falk over his anti-Israeli bias and his suggestion of a U.S. cover-up in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"Throughout his tenure as Special Rapporteur, Mr. Falk has been highly biased and made offensive statements, including outrageous comments on the 9/11 attacks," Rice said.

"Mr. Falk's recommendations do nothing to further a peaceful settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and indeed poison the environment for peace. His continued service in the role of a UN Special Rapporteur is deeply regrettable and only damages the credibility of the UN," Rice added.

Falk is an American professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University and was appointed as special rapporteur in 2008 to a six-year term.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/161395
ani ohevet et Yisrael.
אני אוהבת את ישראל

seafoid

BDB- do you honestly think the Israelis are interested in the 2 state solution?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/ahead-of-israel-election-pa-bid-in-un-may-push-netanyahu-to-harsh-unilateral-reaction-diplomats-say.premium-1.472367

The PA is expected to seek a vote in the UN General Assembly next month, at which point Israel's election campaign will be in full swing, with several parties holding primaries in late November. This is liable to lead ministers and Knesset members to vie with each other over who can offer a tougher response.
Thus even delaying the vote by a few months, until after the Israeli elections, would help prevent a disaster, ministry officials say.
"Even today, the atmosphere in the Prime Minister's Bureau is one of 'this time, we'll show them what's what,'" said a former senior official who was involved in discussions on the matter between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his aides. "Likud ministers will pressure him, the polls will scare him. And from there it's not far to a response that would bring about a violent conflagration or the collapse of the Palestinian Authority."
Senior Foreign Ministry officials and Israeli diplomats abroad have been warning of a scenario in which Israel's government "goes crazy" the day after the UN vote. And far from being insulted, politicians are encouraging this campaign.
"We suggest that the European Union take Israel's political needs into account," said a document ministry staffers prepared for Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon before his meeting this week with EU envoy Andreas Reinicke. "Israel is entering a campaign season, and consideration must be given to the fact that its government, too, is liable to find itself under political pressure to respond suitably to unilateral Palestinian moves."
A similar briefing paper was prepared for Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman before his meeting with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton on Wednesday, and ambassadors worldwide have been asked to give their host governments similar messages.
A senior government official said both Netanyahu and Lieberman warned Ashton that the PA's UN bid would be a "game-changing move" that would spark unilateral Israeli measures in response. "We're asking all these states to make the dangerous ramifications of this move clear to the Palestinians," he added.
Lieberman also told Ashton that the Foreign Ministry has prepared a "toolbox" of possible responses, ranging from relatively mild steps - like revoking PA officials' VIP passes or canceling work permits for Palestinians in Israel - to severe measures like approving construction of thousands of new houses in the settlements or halting tax transfers to the PA. The latter could result in the PA's financial collapse.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

give her dixie

Quote from: seafoid on October 28, 2012, 05:52:38 PM
Israeli embassy slurs Vincent Browne as an antisemite for saying


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-antisemitic-claims-vincent-browne-3276074.html

"Israel is the cancer in foreign affairs. It polarises the Islamic community of the world against the rest of the world"


Vincent fell into the trap of been labelled anti semitic just for been critical of Israel. It is the standard response whenever critism is levelled against them.
Much the same as anyone who is critical of Stormont is now labelled a dissident.
next stop, September 10, for number 4......

seafoid

Quote from: give her dixie on October 29, 2012, 11:16:59 AM
Quote from: seafoid on October 28, 2012, 05:52:38 PM
Israeli embassy slurs Vincent Browne as an antisemite for saying


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-antisemitic-claims-vincent-browne-3276074.html

"Israel is the cancer in foreign affairs. It polarises the Islamic community of the world against the rest of the world"


Vincent fell into the trap of been labelled anti semitic just for been critical of Israel. It is the standard response whenever critism is levelled against them.
Much the same as anyone who is critical of Stormont is now labelled a dissident.
I think the term " antisemite "has become so diluted now through Israeli misuse that it has lost most of its meaning.
It's like "the boy who cried wolf". 
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Ball DeBeaver

The whole raison d'etre of both Hamas and PLO/Fatah is the destruction of Israel. Their ethos has never changed in this matter, so what makes you think they have any intention of allowing the Israelis to live in peace behind ANY border, pre 67 or otherwise.

Do either of you honestly believe that the Palestinians will let Israel have peace if they were to give up Gaza, the west bank and east Jerusalem? Honestly?
ani ohevet et Yisrael.
אני אוהבת את ישראל

seafoid

Quote from: Ball DeBeaver on October 29, 2012, 04:47:14 PM
The whole raison d'etre of both Hamas and PLO/Fatah is the destruction of Israel. Their ethos has never changed in this matter, so what makes you think they have any intention of allowing the Israelis to live in peace behind ANY border, pre 67 or otherwise.

Do either of you honestly believe that the Palestinians will let Israel have peace if they were to give up Gaza, the west bank and east Jerusalem? Honestly?
I do. They have offered Israel full recognition and a demilitarised Palestine but the Israeli Jews want all the land because as Abraham Foxman of AIPAC says they have a covenant with God and they are God's people (WTF).

Fatah is the Palestine Liberation Organisation and Hamas means the Islamic resistance movement.
Anyway, the fact is that 50% of the people living in greater Israel are non Jews and have virtually no rights.
And will Israel be able to pull this off indefinitely? Of course it won't   
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

give her dixie

There has been a case I have been following involving 5 men who have just had their final appeal to the Supreme Court dismissed, and they are to stay in jail. One of them was sentenced to 65 years. Their crime was to provide humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. It is a disgraceful decision, and one that makes a mockery out of US justice.

Below is a background to their case.

The Holy Land Five Case


by NOOR ELASHI

As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and my father remains incarcerated in a modern-day internment camp, the time in which we live begins to feel less like 2011 and more like 1942. But this week could determine whether today's justice system is capable of rewriting the sad chapters of our history. I say this week because on Thursday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the long-awaited oral arguments in the Holy Land Foundation case, involving what was once our country's largest Muslim charitable organization.

Meet my father, Ghassan Elashi. The co-founder of the HLF. Inmate number 29687-177, sentenced to 65 years in prison for his charity work in Palestine. He is an American citizen from Gaza City, who before his imprisonment, took part in the immigration rally in Downtown Dallas, joining the half a million people wearing white, chanting ¡Si, se puede! The prison walls have not hindered his voice, as he writes to me, heartbroken about the homes destroyed during the earthquake in Haiti, the young protesters killed indiscriminately in Syria, the children lost to the famine in Somalia. Most frequently, he writes to me about the Japanese-American internment.

Now meet Fred T. Korematsu, who after Peal Harbor was among the 120,000 Japanese-Americans ordered to live in internment camps. This was in 1942, when President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which authorized the military detainment of Japanese-Americans to ten concentration camps during World War II. Mr. Korematsu defied orders to be interned, because he viewed the forced removal as unconstitutional. So on May 30, 1942, Mr. Korematsu was arrested. His case was argued all the way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled against him, stating that his jailing was justified due to military necessity.

Nearly forty years later, in 1983, Mr. Korematsu's case was reopened, and on Nov. 10, 1983, the conviction was overturned. Judge Marilyn Hall Patel notably said, "It stands as a caution that, in times of international hostility and antagonisms, our institutions, legislative, executive and judicial, must be prepared to exercise their authority to protect all citizens from the petty fears and prejudices that are so easily aroused."

Fast-forward six years. It's already 1989, when my father co-finds the HLF, which becomes a prominent American Muslim charity that provides relief—through clothes, food, blankets and medicine—to Palestinians and other populations in desperate need. Then, in 1996, President Clinton signs the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, giving birth to the Material Support Statute, a law that in time would come under fire by civil libertarians for profiling and targeting Arab and Muslim Americans.

Two years later, in 1998, Clinton awards Mr. Korematsu with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest citizen honor, condemning Mr. Korematsu's persecution as a shameful moment in our history.Three years later, the towers fall.

And President Bush declares a "War on Terror."

In 2001, President Bush signs the Patriot Act, which strengthens the Material Support Statue. The law's language is so vague that it gives prosecutors the authority to argue that humanitarian aid to designated terrorist organizations could be indirect, and therefore, a crime.

In my father's case, he is charged with conspiring to give Material Support in the form of humanitarian aid to Palestinian distribution centers called zakat committees. Prosecutors admit the zakat committees on the indictment were not designated terrorist groups, but according to the indictment released in 2004, these zakat committees are "controlled by" or act "on behalf of" Hamas, which was designated in 1995. Their theory is that by providing charity to zakat committees, the HLF helped Hamas win the "hearts and minds" of the Palestinian people.

The HLF case was tried in 2007, lasting three months, and after 19 days of deliberations, the jury deadlocked on most counts. The judge declared a mistrial and the case was tried the following year.

In 2008, after essentially the same arguments, the retrial ended with the jury returning all guilty verdicts, and in 2009, my father was sentenced to 65 years in prison, for essentially giving humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

In 2010, my father was transferred to a "Communications Management Unit" in Marion, Illinois—the aforementioned modern-day internment camp. The CMU received the nickname "Guantanamo North" by National Public Radio since two-thirds of its inmates are Middle Eastern or Muslim. The purpose of this prison—which has another branch in Terre Haute, Indiana—is to closely monitor inmates and limit their communications with their families, attorneys and the media. Thus, I only get to hear my father's voice once every two weeks, for fifteen minutes. And our visitations take place behind an obtrusive Plexiglass wall.

My father and his co-defendants—now called the Holy Land Five—are in the final stages of the appeal as the oral arguments approach on Thursday. In the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans, defense attorneys will urge the panel of three justices to reverse the HLF convictions based on errors that took place in the trial process.

According to the appellate brief, there's a major fact that undermines the prosecution's claim that Hamas controlled the zakat committees: "The United States Agency for International Development—which had strict instructions not to deal with Hamas—provided funds over many years to zakat committees named in the indictment, including the Jenin, Nablus, and Qalqilia committees," writes my father's attorney, John Cline. He continues stating that in 2004, upon the release of the HLF indictment, "USAID provided $47,000 to the Qalqilia zakat committee."

Furthermore, defense attorneys will argue that the district court:

a) Violated the right to due process by allowing a key witness to testify without providing his real name, thereby abusing my father's right to confront his witness. They are referring to an Israeli intelligence officer who became the first person in U.S. history permitted to testify as an expert witness using a pseudonym.

b) Abused its discretion by allowing "inflammatory evidence of little or no probative value," which included multiple scenes of suicide bombings.

c) Deviated from the sentencing guidelines when they sentenced my father to 65 years.

When putting the lawyerly language aside, human rights attorneys have deemed the HLF case as purely political, perpetrated by the Bush administration. Likewise, the decision to intern Japanese-Americans was based on "race prejudice, war hysteria and failure of political leadership," according to a 1982 report by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

I can only hope that my father's vindication won't take 40 years as it did for Mr. Korematsu. Let us learn from our old wrongs
next stop, September 10, for number 4......

Ball DeBeaver

Quote from: give her dixie on October 29, 2012, 06:05:22 PM
There has been a case I have been following involving 5 men who have just had their final appeal to the Supreme Court dismissed, and they are to stay in jail. One of them was sentenced to 65 years. Their crime was to provide humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. It is a disgraceful decision, and one that makes a mockery out of US justice.

Below is a background to their case.

The Holy Land Five Case


by NOOR ELASHI

As we approach the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and my father remains incarcerated in a modern-day internment camp, the time in which we live begins to feel less like 2011 and more like 1942. But this week could determine whether today's justice system is capable of rewriting the sad chapters of our history. I say this week because on Thursday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the long-awaited oral arguments in the Holy Land Foundation case, involving what was once our country's largest Muslim charitable organization.

Meet my father, Ghassan Elashi. The co-founder of the HLF. Inmate number 29687-177, sentenced to 65 years in prison for his charity work in Palestine. He is an American citizen from Gaza City, who before his imprisonment, took part in the immigration rally in Downtown Dallas, joining the half a million people wearing white, chanting ¡Si, se puede! The prison walls have not hindered his voice, as he writes to me, heartbroken about the homes destroyed during the earthquake in Haiti, the young protesters killed indiscriminately in Syria, the children lost to the famine in Somalia. Most frequently, he writes to me about the Japanese-American internment.

Now meet Fred T. Korematsu, who after Peal Harbor was among the 120,000 Japanese-Americans ordered to live in internment camps. This was in 1942, when President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which authorized the military detainment of Japanese-Americans to ten concentration camps during World War II. Mr. Korematsu defied orders to be interned, because he viewed the forced removal as unconstitutional. So on May 30, 1942, Mr. Korematsu was arrested. His case was argued all the way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled against him, stating that his jailing was justified due to military necessity.

Nearly forty years later, in 1983, Mr. Korematsu's case was reopened, and on Nov. 10, 1983, the conviction was overturned. Judge Marilyn Hall Patel notably said, "It stands as a caution that, in times of international hostility and antagonisms, our institutions, legislative, executive and judicial, must be prepared to exercise their authority to protect all citizens from the petty fears and prejudices that are so easily aroused."

Fast-forward six years. It's already 1989, when my father co-finds the HLF, which becomes a prominent American Muslim charity that provides relief—through clothes, food, blankets and medicine—to Palestinians and other populations in desperate need. Then, in 1996, President Clinton signs the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, giving birth to the Material Support Statute, a law that in time would come under fire by civil libertarians for profiling and targeting Arab and Muslim Americans.

Two years later, in 1998, Clinton awards Mr. Korematsu with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest citizen honor, condemning Mr. Korematsu's persecution as a shameful moment in our history.Three years later, the towers fall.

And President Bush declares a "War on Terror."

In 2001, President Bush signs the Patriot Act, which strengthens the Material Support Statue. The law's language is so vague that it gives prosecutors the authority to argue that humanitarian aid to designated terrorist organizations could be indirect, and therefore, a crime.

In my father's case, he is charged with conspiring to give Material Support in the form of humanitarian aid to Palestinian distribution centers called zakat committees. Prosecutors admit the zakat committees on the indictment were not designated terrorist groups, but according to the indictment released in 2004, these zakat committees are "controlled by" or act "on behalf of" Hamas, which was designated in 1995. Their theory is that by providing charity to zakat committees, the HLF helped Hamas win the "hearts and minds" of the Palestinian people.

The HLF case was tried in 2007, lasting three months, and after 19 days of deliberations, the jury deadlocked on most counts. The judge declared a mistrial and the case was tried the following year.

In 2008, after essentially the same arguments, the retrial ended with the jury returning all guilty verdicts, and in 2009, my father was sentenced to 65 years in prison, for essentially giving humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

In 2010, my father was transferred to a "Communications Management Unit" in Marion, Illinois—the aforementioned modern-day internment camp. The CMU received the nickname "Guantanamo North" by National Public Radio since two-thirds of its inmates are Middle Eastern or Muslim. The purpose of this prison—which has another branch in Terre Haute, Indiana—is to closely monitor inmates and limit their communications with their families, attorneys and the media. Thus, I only get to hear my father's voice once every two weeks, for fifteen minutes. And our visitations take place behind an obtrusive Plexiglass wall.

My father and his co-defendants—now called the Holy Land Five—are in the final stages of the appeal as the oral arguments approach on Thursday. In the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans, defense attorneys will urge the panel of three justices to reverse the HLF convictions based on errors that took place in the trial process.

According to the appellate brief, there's a major fact that undermines the prosecution's claim that Hamas controlled the zakat committees: "The United States Agency for International Development—which had strict instructions not to deal with Hamas—provided funds over many years to zakat committees named in the indictment, including the Jenin, Nablus, and Qalqilia committees," writes my father's attorney, John Cline. He continues stating that in 2004, upon the release of the HLF indictment, "USAID provided $47,000 to the Qalqilia zakat committee."

Furthermore, defense attorneys will argue that the district court:

a) Violated the right to due process by allowing a key witness to testify without providing his real name, thereby abusing my father's right to confront his witness. They are referring to an Israeli intelligence officer who became the first person in U.S. history permitted to testify as an expert witness using a pseudonym.

b) Abused its discretion by allowing "inflammatory evidence of little or no probative value," which included multiple scenes of suicide bombings.

c) Deviated from the sentencing guidelines when they sentenced my father to 65 years.

When putting the lawyerly language aside, human rights attorneys have deemed the HLF case as purely political, perpetrated by the Bush administration. Likewise, the decision to intern Japanese-Americans was based on "race prejudice, war hysteria and failure of political leadership," according to a 1982 report by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians.

I can only hope that my father's vindication won't take 40 years as it did for Mr. Korematsu. Let us learn from our old wrongs


Care to answer the question?



Quote
The whole raison d'etre of both Hamas and PLO/Fatah is the destruction of Israel. Their ethos has never changed in this matter, so what makes you think they have any intention of allowing the Israelis to live in peace behind ANY border, pre 67 or otherwise.

Do either of you honestly believe that the Palestinians will let Israel have peace if they were to give up Gaza, the west bank and east Jerusalem? Honestly?
ani ohevet et Yisrael.
אני אוהבת את ישראל

seafoid

BDB  This week you say

"The whole raison d'etre of both Hamas and PLO/Fatah is the destruction of Israel. Their ethos has never changed in this matter, so what makes you think they have any intention of allowing the Israelis to live in peace behind ANY border, pre 67 or otherwise."

Last week you said

http://gaaboard.com/board/index.php?topic=22339.msg1169215#msg1169215
"Israel doesnt want the people to leave, it wants the headers who attack Israel to leave. But their military is a two edged sword. Without such a strong military, Israel would have been wiped out years ago. With it, they are overly militarised. As long as they feel threatened by their arab neighbours, they will maintain their military might. Catch 22."

So which is it? Are the Palestinian people housetrained enough to ready to live with Israel or not? 
Or do they deserve apartheid instead until they cop on ?
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU